Kasher WILL determine vacancy rights specifically because they are not spelled out in Sup. W/Letter 3.
Read Letter 3 and you'll see that it is the "exception" to the Basic Agreement (Preamble section). Since Letter 3 does not contain vacancy rights, IT DOES NOT CONTROL THEM. That's probably the simplest concept to understand yet at the same time one of the hardest concepts to get get people to fully appreciate. Letter 3 is NOT a stand alone document. It is a supplement to the mother of all contracts, our Basic Working Agreement. If it's not in Letter 3, the Basic Agreements control it.
Expedited arbitration, such as Kasher's, is for Letter 3 issues only. An argument could be made that since this grievance was about vacancies, that it shouldn't have been filed as a Letter 3 expeditied arbitration. Also, just because this grievance is about how management misapplied our vacancies doesn't mean that the only solution, even if he rules for management, is a wholesale erosion of our vacancy rights.
The section of Letter 3 that you quoted has nothing to do with vacancy rights. An AA pilot ONLY has a displacement right. If there are no slots to displace to, you're done, you go on furlough with no future flow back rights. AA pilot do not have vacancy rights at Eagle.
Having been on the receiving end of the "wrath of APA", I find it reprehensible that another pilot group be delt with unfairly or looked upon as inferior.
Join the club! If you're not an AA pilot that was "hired" then somehow in the eyes of many on your side, you're a second class aviator. It really is that bad. That's not to say that the average mainline pilot feels that way, but most seem to have a little or a lot of that attitude. But then when they fly with you, and you fly just like them, they forget that you really aren't "different". It's a stupid prejudice that exists. It's also evidence at how successful management has been at the "divide and conquer" game.
That may have been true in the past, but I sat at the table in November of last year and was involved in the APA BOD discussion trying to get Eagle not only on the same seniority list but under the same representative umbrella and I know there was not person there who expressed ANY of the sentiments you list.
APA only tries to get whats when it has a specific need and not because of any long term future vision to solve any institutional problems. We have tried for 15 years to get APA to see that if we're all on the same list and in the same union, and if we act like one pilot group, we'd all do a lot better in getting management to show up at the negotiating table.
But what does APA do instead? Fight Eagle pilots, fight for more SCOPE, fight to get all the RJ's, tell us that they don't want their military buds to have to fly a stinkin' prop as a new hire, etc..... And what did they get for it? The TA and a fight from the Eagle pilots to preserve Eagle's vacancy rights.
Why was APA "sincerely" looking at bringing Eagle pilots into the fold? To "right" past "wrongs"?? Not on your life! It was to get us and our jobs under their control. Many of us are past APA members and we remember what it was like 10 years ago. APA is sincerely after our jobs and that's about it.
As I try to tell the pro-ALPA AA pilots, you get what your MEC negotiates, not what you deserve. That contract will go down in history as a huge failing for an ALPA-represented carrier. However, the Eagle MEC brought it to the pilot group and they voted it in...correct?
You're correct about the history, but back then our MEC, ALPA National, and management successfully got most of the line pilots to buy into Interest Based Bargaining. In hindsight, as Eagle was becoming "big", this was a way for ALPA to keep us under control. We know that ALPA railroaded us now. ALPA National simply does not fairly or enthusiastically represent regionals when those goals are in conflict with long term mainline goals.
Now with that past history in mind, ALPA National wants us to give into APA, but our MEC and our pilots won't be fooled and National can't do a **CENSORED****CENSORED****CENSORED****CENSORED** thing about it. They've tried and our MEC has told National "no deal". As you've seen, ALPA National will do what they think is good for APA because they want to romance APA at the expense of ALPA members.
I meant park the excess pilots on the least costly piece of equipment in the inventory. In fact, they don't even have to train everyone--just pay them Saab FO pay and keep them home. That's where the $10M/year figure comes from.
Sorry, if the Saabs are making money, and mass displacements will create a huge training bubble, there is no reason to furlough.
There won't be any immediate displacements even if Kasher rules in APA's favor. Until the new airplane deliveries are completed, any flowbacks will go to them until the current number of non-Eagle-rights CA's has been reached. If Kasher rules against APA, at that point, the flowbacks will stop. If he rules in favor of APA, the actual displacements of the non-Eagle-rights CA's will begin.
The grievance is was filed by ALPA against management. It is not against APA. APA doesn't win or lose. AA pilots only have a displacement right not a vacancy right. It's because of management's disdain for living up to a very expensive agreement, Letter 3, that we have this grievance. They'd rather "steal" our vacancy rights then show us the respect of negotiating a solution to their very expensive problem that they were fully aware of when they signed Letter 3.
The 2-3 airplane's-worth figure is all that is advertised as available for the flowback at this time.
With or without the TA, we're getting 2-3 EMB's a month. The training dept has been at that capacity since scaling down the dept post-9/11. They do not need anymore capacity to handle 2-3 planes. And whether Eagle pilots rightfully get Eagle vacancies or not, they still only need to train for those planes regardless of who gets to man them.
Sup. W/Letter 3 allow for flowbacks to displace all Eagle CA's except for Eagle-rights CA's. APA believes new aircraft deliveries will be open to flowbacks because they will be on the property while the displacements are taking place. Until all non-Eagle-rights CA's have been displaced, each new aircraft that arrives will be subject to the provisions of Sup. W/Letter 3.
Show us where you read that in Letter 3. Just because APA believes something, doesn't mean it becomes the law. Pre-9/11, most Eagle pilots believed that we were getting screwed by a misapplication of the Flow Through. It wasn't living up to the verbal expectations that we were told to expect. So guess what management did? That spelled out the "strict" application of Letter 3 to us and said, "Hah! We're doing it as agreed!" It doesn't matter what one believes when it's different from what's written, unless in this case all four parties are in agreement to change it!
APA tried to negotiate. I was there. Again, they(and the ALPA National attorneys) believe that Sup. W/Letter 3 provides for flowback into any Eagle CA seat not held by an Eagle-rights pilot.
Letter 3 allows an AA pilot to only displace a current RJ CAPTAIN, not take an RJ seat. Big difference. We have to have a captain for you to displace. Future deliveries don't have a displaceable captain until an Eagle pilot has bid his rightful vacancy and then chosen or not to become Eagle Rights. At that point, the system knows if there's another slot available for an AA pilot to displace into.
As I learned about 16 years ago, nothing that has anything to do with two pilot groups has anything to do with respect. It is about leverage......
Yep, and you could say that since APA already signed the TA, they don't have the leverage against the Eagle pilots that they could've had if we were brought to the table pre-TA signing. They f#$ked up big time! They already granted SCOPE relief and already gave up your displacement rights. And we're fighting their assault on our vacancy rights as AA and APA have no right whatsoever to change our contract without our consent.
This has nothing to do with management--AA would prefer that we weren't pushing this. Again, APA has been trying to negotiate this since November '02. There is no hijack effort, vacancies are not specifically addressed. In section IV. C. it mentions "CJ Captian positions...available".
You're seeing only what you want to see. I challenge you to read all of this and tell us where you think the theme has anything to do with vacancies. It's only refering to your only right - displacement....vacancy rights do not exist to non-Eagle pilots.
Section IV. Para's A, B, C, and D.
If you'd like to analyze all of those paragraphs here in context, that would be great!
Don't get to altruistic about ALPA.
Didn't. Only was talking about APA and management. ALPA National is not popular at Eagle. Fortunately, our MEC seems to be in step with our pilots on our vacancy rights.
